[Mb-civic] An article for you from an Economist.com reader.

Wed Aug 31 11:23:28 PDT 2005

- AN ARTICLE FOR YOU, FROM ECONOMIST.COM - 

Dear civic,

Michael Butler (michael at intrafi.com) wants you to see this article on Economist.com.

(Note: the sender's e-mail address above has not been verified.)

Subscribe to The Economist print edition, get great savings and FREE full access to Economist.com.  Click here to subscribe:  http://www.economist.com/subscriptions/email.cfm 

Alternatively subscribe to online only version by clicking on the link below and save 25%:

http://www.economist.com/subscriptions/offer.cfm?campaign=168-XLMT

MEASURE FOR MEASURE
Aug 30th 2005  

Investors are mad for risk-appetite indices. What do they actually tell
us?

IT CAN now be revealed that Buttonwood has not always been a fan of
cricket. Brought up in the robust and marginally faster-moving world of
baseball, she has long found the appeal of five-day contests involving
leg-spinners and silly mid-offs inexplicable. Until this brilliant
holiday weekend, that is, when THE ECONOMIST trounced the SPECTATOR
and, in a slightly more publicised match, England edged past Australia.

In much the same way, America's stockmarket edged past news on Monday
August 29th that Hurricane Katrina was set to become the world's
costliest storm ever for insurers, helping to push oil above $70 a
barrel: share prices moved up within half an hour of the market's
opening, though they fell again the next day. It was certainly not the
first time that investors had bought stocks when the news was bad, like
a pitcher shaking off his catcher's signals. Were investors cleverly
re-assessing economic fundamentals (basically solid growth and
still-good prospects for corporate earnings) and upping their rational
valuation of shares? Or were they just irrepressible exuberants on a
tear?

This question, it turns out, is at the centre of one of the big divides
in financial theory. Those who believe in efficient markets think that
prices reflect all known information about future returns. If an
investor happens to feel irrationally feisty when he rolls out of bed
in the morning, no matter: smart money will move in and arbitrage away
the difference between the price he paid for the share and the price
that correctly reflects the discounted value of expected cash flows.

Advocates of behavioural finance, on the other hand, reckon markets are
imperfect. Sophisticated investors are often unable or unwilling to
offset sentiment traders entirely, especially when there are
constraints to arbitrage (it is not always possible to short a stock,
for example). For many, "investor sentiment" does matter. 

Which is just as well, as there are an awful lot of people measuring
it. Take last week. On August 22nd, the UBS/Gallup Index of Investor
Optimism said the slow but steady rebound of investor confidence since
April had continued in August. On August 23rd, State Street Global
Markets' Investor Confidence Index also showed improvement since the
recent low point in May. CSFB's Risk-Appetite Index, which only in
March was reflecting "euphoria" before the big plunge in April and May,
shows another sharp fall in risk appetite over the past two weeks or
so. 

The divergences among these measures are perhaps less surprising than
their congruencies, for they are constructed along different lines with
different variables. UBS polls qualifying American investors about
their expectations for financial markets. CSFB looks not at what people
say but at what prices suggest they are actually doing, evaluating
returns on 65 asset classes around the world to see whether riskier
ones are outperforming safer ones. State Street concentrates on
quantity rather than price. Drawing information from the $9.5 trillion
in global assets that it holds in custody, the bank analyses periodic
changes in this pool to determine whether institutional investors are
assuming more or less risk. 

How well do the different indices capture investor sentiment? The
authors of an article in the Bank of Canada's June FINANCIAL SYSTEM
REVIEW put ten of them under the microscope. They chose five recent
episodes in which markets reacted extremely and indices might have been
expected to reflect unambiguous investor sentiment: the Russian debt
default in 1998, the peak of the dotcom-fuelled bull market, the
beginning of the 2000-2002 bear market, the terrorist attacks of
September 11th 2001 and the beginning of the 2003 bull market. The
chart below shows the results, with CSFB's index best capturing the
moment.

There are literally dozens--maybe hundreds--of other measures of
investor sentiment, ranging from official versions, such as those the
International Monetary Fund and the Bank of England have for
surveillance purposes, to private-sector models, many but not all of
which purport to give a trading advantage. They are branching out fast.
Yale's School of Management, which already has a much-watched index
based on a poll of institutional and retail investors, and tracks
investor sentiment in Japan, is launching similar indices in a number
of new countries, beginning with India next week. And State Street is
planning to break down its global index to show risk appetite
specifically in North America, Europe and Asia. 

Assuming that these indices do actually reflect what they are supposed
to, what do they tell us that is of practical use? Do they predict
future returns? If not, why are investors prepared to pay an arm and a
leg for some of them? After all, the Chicago Board Options Exchange's
VIX contract, which tracks implied volatility in the S&P 500 share
index, is known as the "investor fear gauge"--though it has come
unglued of late.

Academic journals are stuffed with articles about how to measure
investor confidence and what to do with it once you have measured it.
Most suggest that sentiment is not a reliable predictor of long-term
future returns in general. But it may help to predict returns on
certain kinds of shares, says Malcolm Baker of the Harvard Business
School, whose research with Jeffrey Wurgler, of New York University's
Stern School of Business, will be published soon in the JOURNAL OF
FINANCE. Shares in new, small, non-dividend-paying firms--basically,
those without much of a track record and whose shares are hard to
arbitrage--are more likely to outperform when investor sentiment is
pessimistic at the start of the period being studied. 

"I love to see those academic studies saying that sentiment doesn't
matter," says Jason Goepfert, chief executive of Sundial Capital
Research in Minnesota. "That means it'll work all the better. We've
looked at all sorts of indicators--fundamental, technical. It's not
that investor sentiment doesn't fail, but it fails less often."

Sundial's sentimenTrader.com offers a variety of confidence indices to
subscribers, both institutional (including hedge funds) and individual.
Mr Goepfert points to one real-money gauge in particular: the Rydex
fund family, one of the few to make its asset data readily available
and in the past a good indicator of sentiment. Allocations are close to
their all-time most bearish now, with loads parked in the money markets
and a leveraged short position that is greater even than last April,
when most sentiment indicators dived. This suggests that returns are
set to rise over the coming weeks. 

Investor sentiment seems to be most predictive when it is near
historical extremes, and then only in the short term. In the longer run
it has less to say, for returns should reflect the business cycle and
corporate earnings. The big question now is what the impact of sharply
higher oil prices will be. If they act as a brake on global economic
growth, as seems likely, it will knock investor sentiment and returns,
both short-term and long-term, for six.

- - - - - Send comments on this article to Buttonwood (Please state
whether you are happy for your comments to be published)

Read more Buttonwood columns at www.economist.com/buttonwood[1]

-----
[1]
http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/display.cfm?id=2512631

See this article with graphics and related items at http://www.economist.com/agenda/displaystory.cfm?story_id=4339079&fsrc=nwl

Go to http://www.economist.com for more global news, views and analysis from the Economist Group.

- ABOUT ECONOMIST.COM -

Economist.com is the online version of The Economist newspaper, an independent weekly international news and business publication offering clear reporting, commentary and analysis on world politics, business, finance, science & technology, culture, society and the arts. 
Economist.com also offers exclusive content online, including additional articles throughout the week in the Global Agenda section.

-	SUBSCRIBE NOW AND 25% -

Click here: http://www.economist.com/subscriptions/offer.cfm?campaign=168-XLMT

Subscribe now with 25% off and receive full access to: 

* all the articles published in The Economist newspaper
* the online archive - allowing you to search and retrieve over 33,000 articles published in The Economist since 1997 
* The World in  - The Economist's outlook on the year
* Business encyclopedia - allows you to find a definition and explanation for any business term 

- ABOUT THIS E-MAIL -

This e-mail was sent to you by the person at the e-mail address listed
above through a link found on Economist.com.  We will not send you any 
future messages as a result of your being the recipient of this e-mail.

- COPYRIGHT -

Economist.com privacy policy: http://www.economist.com/about/privacy.cfm